it doesn't matter who built it. you can audit the source code and have verifiable certainty that you're dealing with a decentralized network beyond anyone's control.
It's a distributed ledger though. So yes it's public to view it, but in order to update or make changes to that ledger (send a transaction) you need cumulative approval from a bunch of independently owned and operated computers around the world to check and verify that your transaction is legit (ie... Has the mathematical signatures necessary to prove ownership of the sending account).
It's not actually used as currency for daily transactions. It's a fraudulent store of value
It's value lies in the fact that nobody can control it, gate-keep, halt, or reverse transactions on the ledger. Anyone can create a new bitcoin account without needing to register or provide ID, and nobody can stop them from using the network.
That feature is valuable enough to create a consistent userbase willing to spend money on it, which is what gives it monetary value. And from there speculation adds more value of course, and there's gonna be ups and downs in the price for sure due to the specualtion.
and is worthless in a crisis.
Actually it's EXTREMELY valuable in a crisis. When Venezuela had their hyperinflation crisis Venezuelans were all over the internet begging strangers to send them $20 in Bitcoin because they can't get USD into the country, and food sellers didn't want to take their dogshit native currency with a plummeting value.
Next, another thing that makes it EXTREMELY valuable in a crisis is the fact that bitcoin can be smuggled in your mind with zero physical evidence, and nothing that can be seized from you.
All you gotta do is set up a wallet, transfer funds to it, and memorize your 12 word seed phrase. Then you can cross any check point or border in the world with nothing but the shirt on your back and still have access to your funds as soon as you acquire a computer on the other side.
CB stands for central bank.
Bitcoin is designed from the ground up to be decentralized.
In 2013 I did some preliminary research into building a bitcoin mining rig. I determined it would have taken a year to pay off the hardware, and that it would've been cheaper to just buy the bitcoin directly instead of buying the hardware.
So I just said "fuck it" to the whole thing. Cause I didn't want to invest in bitcoin, I wanted a computer that printed money. I would've sold off all the BTC as soon as I got it if I did.
Yes, I'm retarded. Now, I'm still not invested in BTC (probably a bad time to buy RN anyways) and I have all my holdings in a handful of shitcoins and meme tokens I'm hoping take off this cycle. So I'm probably still retarded.
Yall are just mad you didn't buy bitcoin when it was $3 just like the rest of us are.
So if OP says the battery is getting topped off, why have all your comments been addressing the assumption that the radio waves are directly running the motor?
My whole point is that it don't think it's technically impossible to convert radio waves to electricity. Thats all.
Maybe when you make up unnecessary specs like thinkng you can't have a capacitor on the car, and thus have to do that in the air. lol.
Ive said at least 5 times I'm talking about recharging the battery not being impossible, and that the african is clearly lying. And OP never explicitly said radio waves are directly funneled to the motor, so just shows how well you pay attention.
Oh boy, seven month charging times for 300 mile range!
Or another way to think of it is 7 months of sitting idle in a dealer or rental lot and the battery is completely full instead of having slowly drained to 0% during that time.
Even at those numbers it's still a feature.
You can fit a voltage regulator capable of regulating 4 kW/h throughput into a hand crank?
Again.... who said it needs to drive the car directly instead of simply topping off a battery? Even a very weak current is capable of charging a battery.
You're just inventing unnecessary stipulations to say it's not possible.
It… does. Otherwise the vehicle can’t "power itself from radio waves.” The receiver has to be in the car.
Nobody ever said the wireless power receiver needs to be directly connected to the battery with nothing in between to regulate the voltage like you're saying is necessary....
You can still have those capacitors and stuff in the circuit after the wireless power receiver, but before the battery gets the power. It doesn't have to be done on the transmitting end.
Correct, but with the scale of power output required to actually do what the post claims it can do, it would be on the order of what happens to commercial windmills when they don’t shut down in high winds.
How do you know? Have you crunched the numbers? The amount of power needed to generate ratio waves isn't' negligible.
And it seems you're so eager to dismiss the idea outright you're inventing a problem while at the same time explaining how the solution is small enough to fit into a hand crank, and still not putting 2 and 2 together to realize that means the problem is already solved.
Remember in the ‘80s when
No.
There’s hardware in the device to convert the variable voltage of the cranking into a smoothed voltage in order to send it to the battery without the battery exploding. That’s my point; the hardware required to do this WIRELESSLY for a VEHICLE IN MOTION doesn’t exist.
That part doesn't have to be done wirelessly. Just capturing the energy. Everything else can be hard wired on the vehicle.
And I think exploding batteries might be a risk with overvoltage, but I don't think it would be with tiny amounts of energy you'd get from radio waves.
Oh boy, seven month charging times for 300 mile range!
I mean hypothetically if we have a proof of concept that it's at least possible to covert radio wave to electricity, you could make the car's entire body a surface that absorbs the energy.
Then it might be enough to at least use that as a hybrid source of energy, supplementing plugging into the grid.
It doesn't necessarily have to be constant or consistent voltage. There are hand cranks for charging phones. That's hardly consistent but it still works. Guys in prison nigger rig chargers out of just about anything with a current.
As long as it can make a needle jump that power can be stored. And there wouldn't be a single transmission source. You are bathed in radio waves everywhere you go. Cell towers, 3G, 4G, 5G, wifi, radio, television, & satellite. All of which take power to produce, and thus logically contain some power that can be captured.
Again, nothing about that idea sounds fundamentally implausible except maybe the amount of power you can capture relative to what it takes to charge a car battery.
The claim isn't free energy.... It's "free to me" energy.
I think the claim is that the car has a battery that gets constantly recharged using radio waves. So they are not saying it's literally driving on radio waves, just that it's a source of power to recharge the battery. Which at face value sounds at least plausible, but I still think this is bullshit in this case.
But I would be interested to see a proof of concept where someone is actually able to harvest electricity from radio waves, which is the main thing they didn't show.
Also, he's African. So clearly he's lying.
it's why they don't move
If it was AI generated there's no way they'd be able to come up with the same face in 2 images.
Someone did apparently.
Disco never died. It just changed its name.
I'm interested in the one from Quebec but they look like they are promotional spotlights. It there was a actually a series of hundreds of mysterious lights over a major city we'd have heard about it elsewhere by now.
And if we were dealing with 2010 google, you could search these incidents no problem. With 2024 google you're going to get MSM articles telling you why you're racist for searching for UFO videos.
And really all the competing search engines just steal results from google anyways, so they aren't much better.
Some of these look interesting, maybe worth looking into.
But the fact that there's really no citation or way to look it up besides just a place and a day kills off any interest I may have.
Anyone who has time to edit these together with dramatic music and invert the colors on someone of videos should also have time to provide some clickable links to the sources.
You wanna know something else that's creepy.... Modern fingerprint scanners that unlock your phone.
My old one used to be a little disc that read the electrical signals on your finger and got your print that way.
Then I got a new phone and the fingerprint scanner was embedded in the screen. I tried looking up how it actually works, and guess what.
It's a camera. There's now an invisible camera embedded behind your screen, and it takes pictures of your finger to determine what your prints are.
Can it be used to spy on you? There's an app you can download that lets you see what the camera sees, and yes, it can see you clearly.
So what does that mean? They've started making phones with hidden cameras that you can't put tape over now, cause the tape would be right in the middle of your touch screen...
Pretty sinister shit.
You already carry a camera and microphone around in your pocket everywhere you go. They can track everything you do online, and locate you using GPS.
Why on earth would they need to know what pose you're in at any given moment?
I could see this being useful in certain high level espionage scenarios, but for mass surveillance there's nothing they don't already have that gives them better information faster and easier.
There's no way the cheap Chinese piece of shit router I bought 10 years ago contains the specialty hardware necessary to detect minor fluctuations in signals, record those fluctuations in memory banks it doesn't have, process those fluctuations with CPU power it doesn't have, or send that data to an external 3rd party with firmware I never installed on it.
With the level of access necessary to make something like work, they could just sneak into your house and plant hidden cameras everywhere instead.
And BTW.... The reason the ledger is public is because without it being public and transparent, you'd have to have a central authority maintaining it's trustworthiness.
Like imagine we're in a payment dispute.
"I already wired you the $500!"
"No you didn't, I never got it!"
"Ohh yeah?! Here's a receipt from the bank proving it went through and landed in your account!"
In this case the trustworthiness of a central authority provides authentication and settles the dispute.
Now imagine it like this...
"I already sent you 0.005 bitcoin!"
"No, you didn't, I never got it!"
"Ohh yeah, Here's the public ledger and it's saying my 0.005 btc is sitting in your account."
In this case the trustworthiness of the network's source code provides authentication and settles the dispute. But it doesn't work if both of us can't see the ledger, and that's why it's public.